myrjola

January 27, 2005

Interesting and attractive textures - is this from some cave? On the negative side, more indirect light would have worked better (I guess the light comes from built-in flash in this case?) and the left edge feels somehow too restless.

January 27, 2005

One of the first photos with my 20D that I'm comfortable enough to

share on Photo.net and ask critique. All comments are welcome.

January 27, 2005

Perhaps this would work better when cropped as a vertical photo (with the crop focusing on the lit areas)?

January 12, 2005

The refracted light is a nice and original touch that distinguishes this from the usual droplet photos. I do not like the composition that much though, personally I'd have made this horizontal, with the right edge residing a bit past the right side of the droplet, top edge somewhere slightly above the droplet and the bottom below the shadow.

January 10, 2005

Absolutely perfect light and the building on the right is another perfect addition. The only thing I don't like on this photo is slightly too much sharpness for my tastes, but I guess that is subjective.

December 18, 2004

The composition does not work for me; the way the lips are cut in half distracts me.

December 15, 2004

Beautiful light, strong contrast. A good photo.

December 15, 2004

I'd like this more if the top of the car structure wouldn't be but off. I'd also try some kind of different pose for the person in the car.

December 6, 2004

Not sure if the colors feel entirely 'natural', but I can't help liking the wonderful depth created by aerial perspective.

August 30, 2004

If the leafs close to the camera would not be there, I'd like it quite a bit more. While they make the photo more lively than just having the rose and a background, the leafs (in my opinion) detract the eyes a bit too much from the rose itself.

July 24, 2004

Beautiful scene. The only gripes I have with this are the somewhat dull location of the horizon (center) and it is perhaps a bit tilted to the right as well. Other than that, it looks quite good.

July 24, 2004

I tried to convey the cuteness of a young cat, recently "rescued" from

animal clinic to our householf. As I know that pet photographs are

very popular subject, I'm interested to get feedback whether this

manages to be original photo in any way or not. And of course any

other feedback is welcome as well.

July 19, 2004

Looks somehow like the Hubble telescope pictures of some nebula whose name I can't remember right now. And photos taken by Hubble are generally considered to be quite impressive. :)

July 19, 2004

Perhaps not as sharp or noiseless as it could be, but the feeling it imposes is impressive and that's what really counts.

July 19, 2004

Thanks for all comments so far. Yes, the streaks are from the waterfall; the falling water seems to divide into little channels that remain roughly stationary.

John, I agree that the use of long exposure in combination with water is very common and not that original. I took some photos with more normal exposure time as well, one of these is currently available under my home page: The hidden swimmer.

This long exposure photo was just the one that I was generally happiest with.

July 19, 2004

Any feedback and comments are welcome.

July 15, 2004

I tried to create a combination of "water drop" pictures and long

exposure just for curiosity. Any comments about my success or failure?

July 15, 2004

Really great use of depth of field.

May 31, 2004

Nice example of aerial perspective in action. Moody colors.

March 18, 2004

Truly unearthy colors; I don't know how much they have been manipulated or not, but the result is attractive in any case.The only niggle I have this that I would perhaps preferred a bit more of the sky and less of the earth.